New iPad Pro benchmarks are very close to the 2018 15-inch MacBook Pro

Geekbench tests put the new 1TB iPad Pro in sight of the $3,000 15-inch MacBook Pro's single core and multi-core speed, which may restart the conversation about Macs with ARM chips in the future.

John Ternus, vice president of hardware engineering, presenting iPad Pro

Apple has claimed that its new iPad Pro models were faster than 92 percent of all laptops sold in the last year and now Geekbench scores reveal this includes the 13-inch MacBook Pros, and a close proximity to the 15-inch MacBook Pro.

Geekbench compares both single- and multi-core speeds using a series of benchmarking tests and then creating a figure to summarize the results. According to first results on the Geekbench website, the iPad Pro gets a single-core speed of 5030.

That means the highest-spec iPad Pro's single-core performance is 92.8 percent that of the top end MacBook Pro.

Geekbench's scores for multi-core operations are not quite as close, though. For multi-core performance, the benchmark rates the iPad Pro as 17995 and the MacBook Pro as 21251. That puts the iOS device at 85.68 percent of the laptop.

It's not clear how these tests have been performed so quickly, nor could they be authenticated by AppleInsider on Thursday morning. Geekbench data sets are crowd-sourced, so we may see differing figures as more people get iPad Pros.

It is clear that this test was done using the 1TB version of the iPad Pro which comes with 6GB RAM instead of the 4GB in other models. This is also a comparison of specifications in an artificial test -- real-world speeds of the two machines will be different based on the user's workflow but the relative performance should be the same.

What it also shows is that the relative performance between the Intel processors which power the MacBook Pro and the ARM processor in the iPad Pro. The startlingly close figures give weight to analyst Ming-Chi Kuo's claim that Apple will move to ARM for its Macs no later than 2021.

This would be a significant change for Apple but it's far from the first time the company has made such a move. Most recently it moved to Intel from PowerPC but before that the Mac had Motorola processors. It's been reasonable to expect that Apple would manage another transition as smoothly as it did its prior ones but now with these Geekbench figures there is more reason to believe the move would be worthwhile.

I would not be surprised to see some Mac laptops with all Apple chips next year and seriously wonder if the new Mac Pro due hopefully in 2019 may be a hybrid with Intel for virtualization and Apple for all else, dual or quad Apple CPUs? In that scenario, the Intel chips would become the equivalent of the Apple ][ language card we used in the 1970's and early 80's. In fact, it could easily be done as a BTO option on high-end Macs.

Think of not only the performance but also the margin increase for Apple not buying Intel chips and the effect on AAPL.

Anyone sneak a GPU compute test in yet? The A10X was already impressive at 30K, pretty well matching Iris Plus 640, if they doubled that it's going to be an absolute beast.

I just feel like the RAM, as usual, will be the limit before these insane processors are for future editing programs, 6GB for every model would have been nice, as evidently they don't think it hurts battery life to put it on the 1TB. But ah well, iOS does still feel great with 4GB.

Insane as Apple silicon is though...This is just a mental barrier I can't cross for a tablet with iOS's limits no matter how powerful the silicon, still the clamshell life for me. Maybe 13 will continue to free up some restrictions, like allow direct external hard drive support.

Well I would hope so, with the ARM they are installing in the new iPhones, it should surpass the 2018 15-inch MacBook Pro, since the graphics should be taking less power that the MBP. THe covergence is just around the corner for the Mac OS and iOS and by 2021, thought I hate to admit it I probably won't be around to see, but I am getting tired of Apples headlines and any other company using "Is most advanced, powerful (put the product name here) ever." It better be morons or your out of a job.

I would not be surprised to see some Mac laptops with all Apple chips next year and seriously wonder if the new Mac Pro due hopefully in 2019 may be a hybrid with Intel for virtualization and Apple for all else, dual or quad Apple CPUs? In that scenario, the Intel chips would become the equivalent of the Apple ][ language card we used in the 1970's and early 80's. In fact, it could easily be done as a BTO option on high-end Macs.

Think of not only the performance but also the margin increase for Apple not buying Intel chips and the effect on AAPL.

I thought that the new MacBook Air might be the first Mac to get an ARM chip. Guess not yet. But you know it’s coming.

If this is legit, then there're people at Intel pissing their pants right now...

When Apple decides they will make a processor for mac, intel and all others are doomed.

Hurt? Yes. Doomed? Apple is about 5% of their revenue iirc, and they have another two or three years to prepare for the hit? Most of the market won't switch over just because Apples chips are better (see iOS), so Intel will carry on like qualcomm does.

Logic Pro coming out for iOS would mean instant buy for me. I already have the dongles for an MBP USB-C for all the audio gear, I'd assume even with the restrictive file transfer with iOS, thanks to USB-C files would be easily shared with other Macs on the LAN or WAN easily enough and offloaded to free up space.

Anyone sneak a GPU compute test in yet? The A10X was already impressive at 30K, pretty well matching Iris Plus 640, if they doubled that it's going to be an absolute beast.

I just feel like the RAM, as usual, will be the limit before these insane processors are for future editing programs, 6GB for every model would have been nice, as evidently they don't think it hurts battery life to put it on the 1TB. But ah well, iOS does still feel great with 4GB.

Insane as Apple silicon is though...This is just a mental barrier I can't cross for a tablet with iOS's limits no matter how powerful the silicon, still the clamshell life for me. Maybe 13 will continue to free up some restrictions, like allow direct external hard drive support.

IMHO the base cost of $1,199 is awesome for the power. That said I have to admit the jump to one with a pencil and keyboard is rather large. If you don't need the pencil any old USB keyboard could be used with a dongle I assume. I am a little disappointed the Mk1 pencil I already own won't work at all (if I heard that correctly). I could live with its limited functionality if it did.

Anyone sneak a GPU compute test in yet? The A10X was already impressive at 30K, pretty well matching Iris Plus 640, if they doubled that it's going to be an absolute beast.

I just feel like the RAM, as usual, will be the limit before these insane processors are for future editing programs, 6GB for every model would have been nice, as evidently they don't think it hurts battery life to put it on the 1TB. But ah well, iOS does still feel great with 4GB.

Insane as Apple silicon is though...This is just a mental barrier I can't cross for a tablet with iOS's limits no matter how powerful the silicon, still the clamshell life for me. Maybe 13 will continue to free up some restrictions, like allow direct external hard drive support.

6GB probably does impact battery life somewhat but the trade off is worth it for those who need it.

Thankfully, the limitations of iOS wouldn’t affect A-series CPU Macs since they would continue to run MacOS.

If this is legit, then there're people at Intel pissing their pants right now...

When Apple decides they will make a processor for mac, intel and all others are doomed.

If Mac has less than 10% market share in x86 architecture personal computers why would Intel and all others, e.g., AMD, be doomed by Apple moving to ARM on the desktop? Please explain the math behind the "doom" scenario.

I suspect iPad is already causing far greater pain to the x86 world than a switch to ARM on Mac ever will. It will only get worse for x86. At some point a very large segment of the personal computing consumer market will finally realize iPad is already as much, and in many cases has already been for years, much more computer than they will ever need for personal use. The baby boomers are probably one of the last generations to have a ceremonial attachment to big honking claptrap PCs that require swaths of dedicated real estate and half of a den to house and operate. Desktop PCs used to run popular consumer applications today is like having an Allis-Chalmers Combine for mowing your quarter acre suburban lawn. Even Microsoft realizes this with their Surface products, but unfortunately they've incorporated too many Combine features into their vision on personal computing, frankly, because they bought and paid for much of the PC claptrap and baggage. Shrinking claptrap and baggage so it takes up a lot less space doesn't eliminate the claptrap and baggage, it just makes it smaller. The iPad on the other hand, didn't start off with claptrap and baggage. It had only what it needed and subsequent generations have added refinements and massive improvements in performance, capacity, and usability.

Benchmarks are okay I guess, but when you're looking at the iPad you always have to consider that it is not burdened by many of the inefficiencies of desktop PCs. Whatever power it has can be put to better use.

It only makes sense to me to switch to ARM if it dramatically lowers the cost AND dramatically improves battery life AND dramatically improves performance. All the other benefits of ARM don't outweigh the lost of being able to run native x86 OS at native speed (windows with bootcamp) or pretty darn close to it (various windows, Linux and even older Mac OS versions in VMs).

Anyone sneak a GPU compute test in yet? The A10X was already impressive at 30K, pretty well matching Iris Plus 640, if they doubled that it's going to be an absolute beast.

I just feel like the RAM, as usual, will be the limit before these insane processors are for future editing programs, 6GB for every model would have been nice, as evidently they don't think it hurts battery life to put it on the 1TB. But ah well, iOS does still feel great with 4GB.

Insane as Apple silicon is though...This is just a mental barrier I can't cross for a tablet with iOS's limits no matter how powerful the silicon, still the clamshell life for me. Maybe 13 will continue to free up some restrictions, like allow direct external hard drive support.

6GB probably does impact battery life somewhat but the trade off is worth it for those who need it.

Thankfully, the limitations of iOS wouldn’t affect A-series CPU Macs since they would continue to run MacOS.

Yep, this would probably already have been a better chip for the new Air, had the software support been in place.

I just hope macOS on ARM doesn't take the opportunity to get any more restrictive...